Wide Awake

I'm wide awake.

I shouldn't be because it's 2:38 a.m. But while our congressional "leaders" dither, the fabric of our society frays at an ever-alarming rate. The rhetoric has been about a revolution, but what we really need is an awakening.

The number of people dying from the COVID-19 pandemic is staggering. The tally is comparable to other singular events; 1918 Spanish Flu, World War II, or 9/11. The sheer toll is nearly unimaginable. Sadly, we were ill-prepared.

The problem now is not that tragedy has befallen us. It's not about affixing blame for who didn't do this or that. It's certainly not about talking about how resilient we are. People who lived through The Great Depression and World War II were resilient, but they still had to suffer through it. So will we.

It's about what to do right now. It's about simple survival. Not just from the virus, but from the impending economic fallout on a scale we've never before encountered. This ordeal has already been hard. It's likely to get a lot harder.

First and foremost, we must survive the health crisis. If we don't, nothing else matters. Nothing. Complacency kills. That's how we arrived at this point to begin with. Yet, it's still surprisingly pervasive.

It's imperative that we develop a better and swifter comprehensive response. That'll involve extensive testing, at the very least; something we haven't been able to achieve to date. I'll leave the virus solution to the medical experts, but the economic response so far has been bewildering. Trillions of dollars have been misallocated. Propping up financial markets at this juncture is shortsighted and will ultimately prove ineffective as the longer term impact from record unemployment and crippled industries plays itself out. You're delusional if you think there is a V-shaped recovery on the horizon. It simply isn't going to happen.

Sirens should be sounding on near-term economic concerns that involve the crumbling supply chain and the general welfare of the population. The increasing disruption to producing and distributing necessary goods, especially food, is alarming. Priorities are being redefined, and it's a real question mark of whether those responsible for keeping such things intact are even paying attention. Overall policy decision-making often appears incomplete, uninformed, or outright contradictory. We need to do much better and we'll need new leaders to emerge to make it happen.

That's a lot of doom and gloom to digest. I hope I'm wrong, but I fear I'm right. To paraphrase the band U2, this is not a rebel article...but there's been a lot of talk, maybe too much talk. It's time for an awakening.

Leaderless

The last Rotterdam Town Board meeting made one thing resoundingly clear – there isn’t a true leader among any of the elected five members. Procedurally, the meeting was a complete mess. Most have been after the 2009 election. Sure, there are a few political novices among the bunch but there is also a fair degree of experience as well. It’s now 2011 and there has not been much if any progress toward conducting a meeting efficiently or transparently. The cause of that has been the subject of enough finger-pointing to cause a blindness epidemic! At this juncture, it’s beyond disgraceful.

Even worse though, is the rancor. No one on the dais seems to be able to maintain any semblance of professionalism. The disrespect is blatant and intentional. It’s very sad to witness but the real damage isn’t limited to the political participants. It has seeped into the audience. Disrespect has been validated by the behavior of the Town Board members and has now been adopted by too many in attendance. Disrespect breeds disrespect. I have previously stated on this blog that if you intend to hold someone to a higher standard, then you’ve got to hold yourself to that same higher standard first. This Town Board has collectively failed to do that.

It is abundantly clear that every member of the Town Board is trying to advance their own personal agendas at the expense of everything else. Normally, this might not be so surprising but this crew was elected as a unified team with a unanimous Democrat endorsement. What’s occurred since is nothing short of a travesty.

I don’t believe there is a leader among them. If there was, they would have already emerged to quell the fiasco. Instead, each seems hell-bent on fueling it.

The solution lies in upcoming elections. The Supervisor seat and two Town Board seats will be up for election in November. It’s still wicked early so most candidates are not known yet. What we should know at this point is who we definitely don’t want. We need to start looking for those who will bring some professionalism back to the meetings in place of the juvenile antics we have currently. We need to start looking for those who favor rigorous, respectful discourse and debate in place of last minute shenanigans and political maneuvering. We need to look for true leaders.

A View From The Perimeter

Third party politics seem to be flourishing in Schenectady County. The Alliance Party, founded by Roger Hull, is poised to stage a third party threat to city politics. In Town of Rotterdam politics, the No New Tax Party (NNTP) will re-emerge with a return appearance by Brian McGarry. Both men announced their intentions for 2011 pre-Christmas 2010 and have indicated that they would be announcing full candidate slates eventually.

I am intrigued by these developments and will be paying close attention to their evolution. My immediate question regarding these announcements is whether they will be true “independent” endeavors or morph into some hybrid of the two-party state. By that, I mean will they be seeking cross endorsements from the major parties or solely go their own way? This was an aspect I wrestled with to some degree during the first NNTP run. After my previous experience, I prefer a pure independent approach.

From newspaper reports so far, it appears the Alliance Party does not intend to seek any cross endorsements (though I suppose that doesn’t mean they won’t receive any) while the NNTP will be seeking major party endorsements (though that doesn’t mean they’ll receive any) in addition to their independent ballot line. Of course, both efforts will face the daunting task of actually creating their own independent ballot line regardless of whatever endorsements they might receive. Success or failure at that endeavor is really the important wild card either way.

Concern starts creeping in depending on how all of this ultimately unfolds. My whole life revolves around a notion of being “not beholden.” I believe cross endorsements can taint that. The major parties don’t relinquish power easily – they want to pick their own candidates – not be dictated to. Making nice to secure additional ballot lines runs counter to what should be the underlying motivation to create an independent ballot line anyway, in my mind. If major lines are deemed a desirable advantage, then simply primary for them, much like I did in 2009 (much to the Republican Party bosses’ dismay when I won.) My point is that if you think you have appeal to a major party voter base, then appeal to it through a contested primary, independent of party power bosses. Even this approach has a downside though as some people will start to question “your real stripe.”

Of course, I’m not a politician – and politicians and their strategists will tell you my approach is a losing one. (Hey – I lost – they must be right.) I wonder why the major parties are so intent then on trying to usurp independent efforts. Quite simply, it’s because they recognize the threat and are quick to try to diminish it through absorption, if possible, or outright dismissal, if necessary.

Not Beholden

The 2011 election season has (unbelievably) commenced already with local independent hopefuls staking their claim early. I’m not among them nor do I expect to be anytime in the near future. What interests me at the moment is that the major tenets of my campaign seem to have found a continued voice through new candidates. I’d be lying if I said there’s not a degree of satisfaction in that development, but I think it was inevitable – our effort was early but the underlying motivation behind it was pervasive and is now simply taking better shape. I’ll be watching closely to see how it unfolds.

Of course, these developments have caused some to speculate about my political future. I’ve always maintained I was never a politician – just a concerned citizen. I remain so. Being an effective part of the solution doesn’t always involve running for office. Make whatever you’d like of that. I always do what I think I must to be able to sleep at night and look at myself in the mirror the next day.

Keep your eyes on those that step forward. Hold them to their word. Make sure they have a clue beyond their rhetoric. I was happy to read a comment on another forum recalling my philosophy of not being beholden. It was discussed in a political sense, but the phrase “not beholden” wasn’t just for my campaign. I actually live by that every day. It has helped me succeed, and at the same time, it has held me back, but it works for me.

No Respect

I had the great misfortune of accidentally stumbling into a replay of the most recent Rotterdam Town Board budget vote meeting. Overall, it was probably one of the most embarrassing public displays ever by an elected body.

Personally, I was deeply disturbed by the proposed budget by the Supervisor which would’ve resulted in a 7.4% residential tax increase, and a whopping 11.4% commercial tax increase. It is incredulous that this budget was submitted by an administration that ran for election on a platform of lowering taxes!

Now, I’m supposed to be relieved by the surprise 11th hour budget proposal, subsequently adopted in a contentious 3-2 vote, by 3 of the dissenting Town Board members that results in a 3.5% residential tax increase and a 7.4% commercial tax increase? I’m not. Seemingly, I’m supposed to be enamored of these three so-called “3 Musketeers” for being my tax relief champions. That’s equally ludicrous! All of these officials campaigned on lowering taxes. Obviously, they can’t deliver. They should be voted out.

The truly disgusting part is not only did we just get a tax increase, but we got it by way of severe dysfunction and incivility. I’m reminded of that campaign question about getting along after elected that I’ve discussed a few times since. The Rotterdam Town Board has achieved the epitome of dysfunction, evidenced by the manner of budget deliberations, or lack thereof. Apparently, the members of the Revitalize Rotterdam Team are each choosing to go their separate ways…and they don’t seem to be hesitant about expressing their displeasure with one another quite rudely. The Supervisor demands respect yet then shouts at another Town Board member to “shut their mouth” while also calling them a “liar.” The councilmember on the receiving end of the insults is outraged by the show of disrespect yet is the same member that publicly shredded a resident a few months ago in an equally harsh manner. The bickering is childish, unprofessional, and utterly disgraceful. It’s also counterproductive. The fact that it is done publicly makes it even more so.

The reporter for the Spotlight seems equally out of touch – headlining a recap of the circus with stating the budget “cuts spending, lowers taxes.” That’s just plain wrong. The budget they adopted RAISES taxes. They only cut spending and lowered taxes relative to the previous outlandish proposal which really means they didn’t do either.

There should be one realized objective driven by one critical question: 0% tax increase by asking the question, what is absolutely essential? I’ve offered my views on how to achieve this objective in the past (November 2008). Until our elected start addressing the question properly we as taxpayers will get no respect.

Alliance Party

Schenectady’s Sunday Gazette provided some interesting news in an editorial offered by Mr. Roger Hull, former Union College president. He, along with some others, announced the formation of the Alliance Party, a new party designed to be an inclusive, solution-minded vehicle. I absolutely love the concept he describes. My original hope for the No New Tax Party effort was similar - attract participants and candidates of as many parties as possible and shed the usual constraints that serve to impede real solutions – though we failed to accomplish that with regard to candidates, even if we attracted supporters from across the spectrum. It was an honest start anyway and I’m heartened to see others attempting to take it to the next level because I think it can work.

Not surprisingly, the effort is already the subject of scoffing from several quarters. Once again, the same people who claim to want a different approach that yields results are reluctant to embrace this initiative. The same old arguments of splitting the vote, ulterior motives, or sheer impossibility are being recycled. There even seems to be some jealously from former independent hopefuls that have offered some similar thinking on some subjects! Sorry, but in my mind, no one owns a monopoly on previously expressed ideas that get us better government.

I particularly like the self-imposed term limits the Alliance Party will rely on. Though I didn’t make it an express part of my campaign for office, I intended to do exactly that if elected. By doing so, it takes the influence of special-interest money out of the equation.
Their idea of a pay freeze is also one I support. I’ve previously fought against pay raises for elected officials. It should be all about a desire to serve, not compensation. Transparency and Quality of Life, two subjects I’ve written about in the past, also appear to be cornerstone elements.

Personally, I’m excited to see this effort unfold. I’ll be attending the forum being held at the Eastern Parkway Price Chopper tonight at
7:00 pm to learn more firsthand.

Seeking Leaders

Where are today’s leaders? From top to bottom, our government doesn’t seem to have many, if any. Rancor, partisanship, and even corruption seem to infect nearly every discussion and issue. As a result, important needs go unaddressed. Possible solutions get postponed or stifled altogether. And nothing changes…except for the worse.

A big part of the problem is the influence of special interest money in both major parties. It doesn’t seem to matter if either Democrats or Republicans hold the reins because the only true difference is which special interests get served. The hard working American is always left holding the short straw. As a result, anger has been building among the electorate and an optimist would say that things are finally on the verge of change. The Tea Party has emerged and is beginning to flex its apparent might.

And that’s where it all begins to unravel again unfortunately. Both major parties have recognized the anger as a force to be reckoned with and have begun to re-fashion themselves as Tea Party champions. Among the scary hopefuls are personalities like Palin, O’Donnell, and Paladino. If these are our saviors, I’m sad to say we are doomed. Even for more “traditional” Tea Party candidates, money has flowed relentlessly to support those “with a shot.” Palin seems to fancy herself as some sort of kingmaker. O’Donnell is carrying enough baggage to sink her candidacy several times over. Paladino continues to try to paint himself as a reformer when in fact he is among the biggest insiders NY has ever known. In my eye, the hope that was sparked by the anger has deteriorated to desperation candidates. The Tea Party candidates emerging are extremely divisive and have given strong voice to the fringe. Personally, I am disappointed but not surprised by that progression.

One of the more interesting questions posed to me when I ran for office last year regarded the ability to work effectively together with whoever got elected to get things done that needed to get done. It was a perceptive question, especially considering the dysfunction and discord that has ensued among those that were united before the election but have since assumed individual agendas and relegated effectiveness to the sidelines. The local discourse in Rotterdam has once again turned nasty and divisive. I am greatly disappointed in that development as well.

So what’s the answer? My friend at Poli-Tea recently provided an excerpt from the Huffington Post that I found intriguing in its simplicity.

Once you begin to expose that two-party, Democratic versus Republican paradigm for the manufactured fraud that it is, a political opportunity starts to emerge.
Drop the theatrics of left versus right and you see that both parties are united
in their corruption by special-interest groups. Suddenly, a real alternative
founding principle becomes clear; one that could effectively rally the support
of a significant number of Americans. Our country needs a third political
party based on the explicit rejection of lobbyist money as its fundamental,
unwavering principle. This party sales pitch would be clear and compelling;
"Unlike the Democrats and Republicans, we aren't corrupt."
Because this party will break the chains of left versus right, its policies would be unlikely to fit neatly into the current paradigm. The traditional questions of big
government versus small government would be replaced by an emphasis on effective government.

People have lost faith in our current political system and with
good reason. I believe we're close to a tipping point, where the incredible
advances in communications technology combine with a strong anticorruption
philosophy to help build a political party that breathes life into American
democracy before it's too late.

In practice, I don’t believe it will be as simple as described but the emphasis on effective government is certainly the key. Many think they know my mind and will be perplexed by this post. I’ve always been a registered Republican but I wouldn’t say I’m a Republican anymore. I’ve agreed with some Democrat objectives, usually taking issue with implementation, but I’m no Democrat either. I consider myself to have conservative leanings but I’m fairly certain Conservatives would lynch me, and though I hold some liberal views on certain topics, I’d lynch myself if I thought I was a Liberal. I’m definitely angry, and have been for longer than most others that have recently been motivated by their own anger, but I’m definitely no Tea Partier either. The rhetoric of their “leaders” scares the hell out of me. Anger, in itself, just isn’t enough. It has to be tempered and magnified simultaneously and then focused thoughtfully to realize worthy accomplishment. It’s easier to be loud and angry than to translate the anger into meaningful and desirable change. I don’t believe the Tea Party has quite figured that out yet.

Just consider me an independent – totally and completely – and if you think you know my view on a particular aspect, you’ll probably wind up being surprised to learn my actual view. My views are as disparate as they come. Sometimes they are even contradictory. That dichotomy gets reconciled through effectiveness, which is something I’m usually skilled at. I’d like to see my leaders equally skilled.

2010: A New Odyssey

Don’t send out the St. Bernard…I’m still alive. After intentionally burning my candle at both ends and anywhere else it would burn, I have purposely simplified my life for 2010.

I’ve intentionally refrained from offering much unsolicited comment since the election. That’s mostly a result of some personal circumstances that dictate my energies be directed elsewhere, but also from a desire to reenergize myself after the exhausting demands of last year’s campaign. Additionally, I thought I’d try to avoid criticizing the new administration while they rolled out their vision for town affairs. However, I’m not particularly pleased about most of what they’ve unveiled and implemented so far. It appears it’s business as usual – where politics, favors, and rhetoric continue to rule the day.

Eventually I’ll post the final installment to my election analysis, but lately I’ve been contemplating the best path forward for independent politics. Current election law makes the scenario of duplicating our local effort very challenging if not unlikely. The No New Tax Party (basically Rotterdam’s version of the Tea Party) was a ballot line that ceased to exist the day after the election. To keep it or any other independent ballot line alive in coming elections will require a level of unparalleled motivation and commitment to collect the necessary signatures. It is a daunting task and the effort required is incomprehensible to anyone that hasn’t tried to do it.

As far as the local effort is concerned, these are among what I consider to be the key elements going forward:

• What individual will lead this effort?


• Is this individual capable of mustering the necessary manpower?


• Can he motivate enough voters?


• Does he have the courage of his convictions?


• Is he knowledgeable on the specific local issues that face us?


• Does he have a plan for addressing those issues beyond the rhetoric?

These questions can be asked equally about any candidate but they become particularly important when looking for that elusive alternative…otherwise, why even go through the trouble of creating an alternative? I will be curious to see if a local independent line gets created again for this or any other election, or will “independent” hopefuls simply seek the path of least resistance and operate within the entrenched two-party system?

The answer to that question may be reflected in what has been going on nationally. Last week, Tea Party Nation organized a controversial tea party convention that in my opinion was not reflective of the grass root intentions of the majority of tea party participants. From the questionable motivations of the event organizer to the role of Sarah Palin, the convention seemed to be a perverted version of real tea party sentiment.

My friend at Poli-Tea has numerous worthwhile commentaries and analysis on the relationship of independent politics and the two-party system. The links below are to a few of his more recent posts that I found interesting and I hope you’ll explore them too.

On the Inevitable Failure of Strategic Infiltration, or, the Degeneration of Tea Party Activists into Petty Party Functionaries
http://politeaparty.blogspot.com/2010/01/on-inevitable-failure-of-strategic.html

All Jokes are Half Truths and the Joke is on You: if You Support Democrats or Republicans, You are the Problem
http://politeaparty.blogspot.com/2010/01/all-jokes-are-half-truths-and-joke-is.html

Already Dead: the Democratic-Republican Partisan Paradigm in the Age of the Independent Voter
http://politeaparty.blogspot.com/2010/01/already-dead-democratic-republican.html

Pretend-ependents and the Tea Party Movement
http://politeaparty.blogspot.com/2010/02/pretend-ependents-and-tea-party.html

Tea Party Revolution Suffers Defeat at the Hands of Red-Coated Loyalists to the Two-Party State, Some Carry On the Work of Real Opposition
http://politeaparty.blogspot.com/2010/02/tea-party-revolution-suffers-deafeat-at.html

Post-Election Analysis: Icarus Falling

Part 2 in a series


Thought I was different and it seems I’m just the same
As a game I put my hand over the flame
Thought I was smarter as I flew into the sun
But it turned out the way it does with everyone

---lyrics from the song Moth on the album Revelations by Audioslave

This isn’t the first time I’ve highlighted noteworthy lyrics by Chris Cornell. I’ve always been a student of the lesson of man and his limitations. There can often be many different motivations for reaching beyond them. In my case, I’m guilty of being an idealist. Idealism often leads to the pursuit of lofty goals but it’s also a path that leads directly into the sun. Tough gig.

The election is over. I lost. The alternative choice we had hoped to provide by creating the independent No New Tax Party ballot line was not fully embraced by the electorate, although we pulled some significant numbers in spite of prognostications otherwise. In the end, it simply wasn’t enough.

The ramifications of our involvement though have caused many to speculate that “we split the vote” and were responsible for the paradigm shift of power in the town. A Republican supermajority was transformed into a Democrat supermajority overnight. It was a Democrat sweep of epic proportion.

So what does that mean? First, it means some people (ousted Republican incumbents and their leadership) are really, really p*ssed. They attribute the loss solely to the existence of the No New Tax Party. They assume that we split the vote and ALL our votes, or at least the majority of them, would’ve gone to the Republican candidate. Maybe, but I don’t agree. The argument is fair enough but I think it’s too simplistic. Here’s why: it doesn’t account for the fact that we appealed to independent voters, some that may not have even voted otherwise and also that we commanded many Democrat votes as well. It also doesn’t account for the impact of an ill-advised Republican attempt to create a new town-wide tax district prior to the election. In other words, it’s plausible that the Republicans lost because of their own missteps. There is an element of party arrogance that hasn’t been acknowledged. People definitely wanted and voted for “change.” We tried to provide it in the form of the No New Tax Party but instead the voter opted for the “change” offered by the Democrats. In my opinion, the Republicans would’ve lost the election either way, albeit by a narrower margin perhaps.

Let’s take a closer look at my race in particular. Remember, I won the primary in September to secure the Republican ballot line and thus, essentially returned the dynamic in my race to the traditional dynamic of two-party politics. I was competing in a separate, special election rolled into the general election. My opponent was a Democrat, who also had the Conservative endorsement. I’ve been the recipient of some Republican leadership wrath because they lost control of the town when their candidates fell to the Democrats. They blame me. I don’t believe the blame is warranted but I understand how I make a convenient scapegoat. If the Republican leadership really was interested in keeping seats, they would’ve supported me after I rightfully won the Republican primary. They didn’t. Moreover, a prominent Republican state assemblyman appeared on my Democratic opponent’s campaign mailer days before the general election. I lost by 572 votes and actually commanded more total votes than either of the two big dog Republican candidates running for the 4 year terms in the other race. Not too shabby in my book. Maybe some party support could’ve changed the outcome?

Let’s forget about the “what-if’s?” I lost. I only had a Democratic opponent. There wasn’t anyone else “to split the vote” unless I want to count my Republican primary opponent who stayed in the race on two minor party lines and garnered 403 votes. My point is the night belonged to the Democrats likely no matter what. Oddly, that point is in the same instant scoffed at by the Republican leadership when it’s being used to explain their defeat, but then offered as the reason for my defeat had I had their support or not.

We created the No New Tax Party in response to a perception that voters wanted an alternative. Undeniably, some did. I garnered 3098 votes unofficially in my race. I suspect about half of those were cast on the No New Tax Party line. Overall, however, the voter dynamic we envisioned and were relying on to win the election never materialized as evidenced by our individual totals on our independent line. We failed to motivate enough unaffiliated voters to come out and vote for us. We also didn’t pull enough from the two parties.

Failure? In some views, yes. Not in mine. I’ve always believed failure is an integral part of eventual success. Let’s consider it victory delayed. We most certainly lost, but we also had many noteworthy accomplishments that hopefully, strengthen the foundation of future third party independent campaigns.

Next series installment: Inside the Numbers

Post-Election Analysis: The Agony of Defeat and the Thrill of Victory

Part 1 of a series

My campaign experience, like probably most others, was a series of ups and downs. Yet, some of my biggest ups and downs were superimposed on each other. The euphoria of securing enough petition signatures to file our ballot petition was tempered by my daughter unexpectedly being hospitalized. The triumph of winning my Republican primary was muted by the somber news of a good friend’s death in the moments before results started coming in. It seemed inevitable that joy would be elusive for me in this pursuit. On Election night, it became clear to me early that the trend of the result tallies were going against me and that I would eventually lose. I had set out to win. Expectations from five months of grueling, non-stop effort were evaporating with each district that reported. Surprisingly, the disappointment of this trough passed almost instantly, countered perfectly by a peak; the joy of my daughter’s impending wedding. Throughout the campaign, I spoke about priorities. Personally, mine are back in alignment.

Candidate Forum

The Schenectady County League of Women Voters will be sponsoring a Rotterdam Candidate Forum on Tuesday, October 20th at the Rotterdam Branch Public Library. The event is scheduled to begin at 6:15 pm and is scheduled to end at 8:15 pm.

This is an event I have attended several times in the past as a voter. I’ve always found it beneficial in some regard. This time, of course, I will be there as a candidate. I hope my views can offer the same benefit of helping voters make their choice.

I like this event because it tries to assemble all the candidates for office in one place, gives them each an opportunity to briefly lay out their message, and provides those in attendance to ask the candidates questions.

Nearly the entire Town of Rotterdam Town Board is being contested, with races for Town Supervisor and 3 Town Council seats. This year the event takes on even more significance because of the inclusion of the No New Tax Party slate of candidates. Voters will get to choose from 3 candidates for each slot instead of the usual two.

It’s a great opportunity to get better informed on the important issues facing the town and the vision each candidate has for addressing them. I hope you’ll attend.

Taking Stock

With 3 weeks to Election Day, I thought I’d take a moment to reflect on a few things. Becoming a candidate for office and subjecting myself to the rigors and scrutiny of campaigning has reinforced my distaste for many aspects of status quo politics. But that reinforcement only reaffirmed that I took the right path when I decided to get more involved. From the very beginning for me, it’s been about “changing the game” rather than “playing it.” I’ve been fortunate to be able to remain true to the unorthodox approach I set for myself when I jumped into the mix so my integrity is still intact anyway. (I’ve offered other early reflections in a guest post on Poli-Tea a few weeks ago.)

By the way, I succeeded in winning my primary in September for the Republican ballot line, knocking off the hand-picked candidate chosen by the party. I’m told that has significance because with a major party line “I might be able to win.” I find that pretty amusing. I don’t attribute the same significance to securing that ballot line as others do. I think the independent No New Tax Party ballot line we created is more powerful than it gets credit for. If elected, I hope that’s where I garner the votes.

Here’s how I view the significance of winning the Republican primary. It’s a giant win for the credibility of the No New Tax Party candidate slate. It’s proof that our message is resonating with voters. It’s proof that message and effort can trump party boss agenda. In addition, it was good strategy because it eliminated one of our opponents earlier. In the end, labels shouldn’t matter. Whoever gets elected is supposed to represent all the residents, not a select few.

That last sentence brings to mind a question posed to me at a recent Rotterdam Business Association dinner we were invited to speak at. The questioner essentially acknowledged and appreciated the alternative choice the No New Tax Party candidates would provide voters but wanted to know how we’d be any different at being able to get along with each other or someone else in order to actually facilitate solutions. It was a great question. In one swoop, it encompassed all the hope and promise our slate of candidates offered while also introducing the entrenched underlying doubts and fears about politicians promising change. Being able to overcome differences and produce results is always the wild card factor. I answered the question the best I knew how in the moment and I hope it sufficed but I haven’t stopped asking it in my head. Just the fact the question was posed demands one goal must be being able to consistently put aside partisanship and simply produce the results that are needed. In the end, it all comes back to shedding labels for real and working for the public good, not that of some special interest. For me, the question itself now serves as a constant reminder of that obligation.

Our third party involvement in this election has already impacted policy and actions of the other candidates. The current administration originally sought to unilaterally impose a new town-wide tax district. The No New Tax Party candidates were the only ones to take an early position against it and publicly oppose it. Our outspokenness contributed to sending the issue to a future public referendum to decide the matter. The No New Tax Party candidates advocate a 0% tax levy increase for the next 2 years. That entire notion was originally dismissed by the current administration that said that approach was both impossible and irresponsible, yet they eventually followed that with a tentative budget proposal that yields no tax increase. (Isn’t it funny how it suddenly becomes possible in an election year?) Our other opposition adopted a campaign flyer banner of the Tax Cut Team. It seems like the major parties want to be more like us all of a sudden. That tells me we’ve been listening to the voters better than they have because we were there first and we were there early. Win or lose, we’ve definitely been successful in shaping the discussion. But we were never in it to simply have influence on the dialogue. We’ve always been in it to win and affect the change people want. In 3 weeks, we’ll find out.

The Impossible Becomes Possible

History was made today in the Town of Rotterdam and Schenectady County when the No New Tax Party filed their independent nominating petitions. The alternative that voters have long sought will be available to them in the General Election in Schenectady County on November 3, 2009.

The event was documented in video and still photos (certain to find their way to our website and other forums in short order) by supporters that arrived to witness the formal petition submission. In addition, esteemed TV news reporter Kumi Tucker from News Channel 13 captured complete footage of the candidate’s news conference in the parking lot of Schenectady County Board of Elections which aired on the 5:30pm, 6:00pm, and 11:00pm News Channel 13 newscasts and can be found on their website.

Over 1700 signatures were submitted, far surpassing the thresholds for filing. The sheer magnitude of signatures submitted is testament to the growing sentiment of voters demanding tax relief, accountability, and transparency from those they elect. The support garnered by the No New Tax Party candidate slate is a reflection of the dissatisfaction with the status quo of governance.

Many thought this effort was an impossible task. Guess what? The impossible task just became possible. Undeniably, it was a monumental undertaking. The process was grueling. Success was fueled by the outpouring of support behind each successive door we knocked on. Our effort was unrelenting, driven by our desire to ensure the people’s voice was heard.

Today is just the beginning, not the end. The momentum is building daily and I’d like to extend my sincere gratitude to The Albany Tea Party Patriots, The Upstate Conservative Coalition, The Constitution Party, and Primary Challenge for lending their support in making this effort succeed. To all the dedicated volunteers that worked long grueling hours alongside us to make this effort a success, I offer my humble thanks. I reserve the highest praise for the residents we visited and spoke with. Their input of views and concerns, and of course signatures, is the real pillar of the effort’s success. The excitement of potential is palpable.

No New Tax Party

The Daily Gazette reported today on an extraordinary new effort taking shape. The effort is a grassroots independent ballot line initiative that I am pleased to say I am part of. I thought it appropriate to clarify our initiative in my own words, now that Mr. Lamendola has given you his interpretation of our effort.

Our candidate slate is comprised of:

Brian McGarry for Rotterdam Town Supervisor
John Mertz for Rotterdam Town Council
Michael O’Connor for Rotterdam Town Council
Brad Littlefield for Schenectady County Legislator District 4

We are collectively, trying to collect petition signatures in an effort to create a new independent ballot line, the No New Tax Party. It is a monumental task.

Our message is simple and straightforward: No New Taxes. We are all committed to 0% tax increases for the next 2 years. We believe it is a realistic and achievable goal. More importantly, we know from knocking on hundreds of doors that it is what the people need, want, expect, and demand. The taxpayer is maxed out. He desperately needs relief.

This is not, as Mr. Lamendola reports, an “insurgency.” Insurgency implies that our cause is illegitimate. Insurgency also negatively introduces a suggestion of unlawfulness or armed revolt. Our effort can more accurately be described as a grassroots movement. It is intended to create a totally new dynamic of governance. A dynamic where taxpayer concern is placed first. We aim to shed the labels and constraints of party politics we’ve grown accustomed to and replace them with a true commitment to fiscal restraint and tax dollar efficiency. We intend to be held accountable.

Are these ideas brand new? Of course not. We’ve all heard politicians promise these things before but they have failed in large part to deliver on that promise. Our effort is the tangible incarnation of the displeasure associated with that failure. We have taken the highly visible tax protest gatherings we’ve witnessed across the nation to the next logical level. Action. We’ve become candidates for office to facilitate solutions to the dissatisfaction already so prevalently displayed. Despite what appear to be insurmountable odds against our success, we are motivated to try nonetheless. If we fail, we’ve tackled an “impossible” task and reinforced its impossibility. (Or maybe we’re just the wrong messengers.) If we succeed, then we’ve suddenly made the “impossible” possible. We intend to succeed and believe we can.

It’s been suggested in some circles that our actions are “destructive.” I prefer to think of our actions as creative. I’ve heard the term “creative destruction” by some and maybe that is the best description. We are challenging the status quo for sure and in that sense, success would certainly lead to the demise or destruction of certain party interests, I suppose. I think that’s a good thing. Governance should be about the people’s interests. Our goals, however, revolve around what we intend to create, not destroy. We need to transcend the negativity and distractions that currently engulf our electoral process and return to a mindset of accomplishment that best serves the electorate’s needs.

Pinnacle of Dysfunction

As a New Yorker, I am appalled and disgusted by the circus we call our state government. If I ever had any doubts about replacing every last one of our state elected “leaders”, they have been dispelled. The current shenanigans occurring in the state Senate demand a backlash the likes of which our elected officials have never before seen. It is my opinion that every single solitary member of the Senate deserves to be voted out of office at the first available opportunity. Spare no one. Every single one must go.

Why? It is an obvious travesty that the peoples business has been relegated to an afterthought. But listen to the rhetoric coming from both sides. It’s laughable if it wasn’t so disturbingly pathetic. All the main players should be asked to resign immediately. They won’t of course. The remainder of them, even the ones you never heard of and who may be keeping their mouths shut also have to go at the earliest opportunity. There is not one voice speaking for us, the people, throughout this crippling inaction. Where are the leaders? Not one is fit to remain in office, if only for their failure to effectively speak up and stand against what has paralyzed our state government. The whole affair is sickening. Someone… everyone… must be held accountable.

The icing on the cake is that we get to pay through the nose for these elected officials to act like crybabies while they simultaneously do the people a disservice by doing nothing! Interestingly, I recently read a letter to the editor in the local paper that asked the governor to let the stalemate continue. The writer liked it just fine that these clowns weren’t acting on any legislation…therefore, no passage of new taxes or other hindrances they are notorious for providing.

This is the clearest example yet that our state government needs a complete overhaul. Please join me in first demanding that these stooges resign. If they refuse, show them the door at the next election.

7th of July

It’s appropriate I think that today, July 7th kicks off petition signature gathering for Independent Nominating Petitions in New York State. There is a sea change of voter sentiment in progress. There have already been two major successful Tea Party events in Albany alone. The New York State Senate demonstrates new lows in dysfunctional government and disregard for the voters of New York daily. People are truly fed up. I think we will see them actually do something about it next election. My belief stems directly from the conversations I’ve had with voters after knocking on their doors.

Assuming I can successfully navigate NYS Election Law, you’ll soon have ballot alternatives at least when it comes to the Town of Rotterdam and Schenectady County. Not alternatives just to be alternatives but alternatives offering real solutions. The “revolution” is beginning. It’s time to declare your independence again by seeking out these alternatives when you enter the voting booth. Our elected leaders must be held accountable. Many of them have forgotten that they are elected to serve us. We can do better. We must do better.

So as you begin to enjoy your summer with election thoughts far from your mind, know that the next level of independence – independence from two-party politics and gridlock, independence from the strangle-hold of ever-increasing taxes, independence to achieve the quality of life we deserve and tax relief we require – is a knock on your door away. Will you answer it? I hope so.

Winds of Change

I read Mr. Arthur R. Wargo’s letter-to-the-editor in yesterday's Daily Gazette (Why one longtime GOP voter is giving up on it) with particular interest. Mr. Wargo’s culmination of disgust seems to be predicated on the current dysfunctionality of our state government but it clearly transcends that one aspect. It is another glaring example of deteriorating sentiment and support for the major political parties.

No, I am not going to become a Democrat, but will register
as an independent, hoping that someday there will emerge a
strong third party that will force the others to pay more attention
to the needs and wishes of the people and not to special interests
and/or their own selfish agendas.

The burgeoning rank of independents is a clear sign to me anyway that the time for a viable third party to emerge is upon us. Obviously for that to happen, ordinarily “uninvolved” people will have to step forward and become “involved.” Swelling disillusionment logically suggests that the needed candidates will come from the burgeoning rank. Candidates that emerge will come from a different mold. They’ll likely be ordinary people from different walks of life sharing one common coupling of traits. They will be as fed up as you are and they’ll be motivated to be beholden to no one but the taxpayer they represent and they will not let the assumed obstacles in their path to that quest deter them from succeeding. That is currently a rare coupling to encounter.

The problem for the people that step forth, of course, is acceptance as a viable candidate by the electorate. Let’s face it, you won’t be the typical candidate they’ve become accustomed to and even though they’re as fed up as you are, they still might not be able to believe the ingrained obstacles (money, time, special interests, etc.) can be conquered… by you or anyone else. That’s the challenge – can you get the non-believers to believe?

It’s somewhat of a Catch-22. Belief is earned through delivering. To get the chance to deliver, you’ve got to already command enough belief that will translate to votes in order to deliver. A leap of faith is essential at the beginning. I believe if I’m fed up enough to get “involved” then people, like Mr. Wargo, are fed up enough to be willing to take that initial leap of faith.

The Reason Why

I’ve encountered a few people that seem a bit bewildered by my entry into the political arena. They have a hard time understanding why I’d subject myself to the possibility (likelihood?) of unsubstantiated negative personal attacks. Politicians, in general, are not held in the highest regard. So why would I be interested in what they view as a “game?”

I have to admit that I asked myself the same question early on before committing to getting more involved.

The answer though, is pretty simple. As I stated in another recent post, I don’t accept the apparent futility of trying to achieve what appears to be an unachievable goal. Perseverance yields results. I can attest to that personally. More importantly, it’s not a “game,” even if the politicians treat it as one. That’s part of the problem. I’m not a politician. I’m not getting involved to “play the game.”

I have an objective that I believe the vast amount of town residents share with me. It includes relieving our tax burden, protecting our Quality of Life, and ensuring that proper Comprehensive Planning gets done.

So I guess the answer is I’m not getting involved to “play the game,” but more to end the game. {I know the thought “It can’t be done,” just crossed your mind so see my post Tell Me I Can’t before proceeding.} It’s important I try (at least to me and I hope to you.) I need to be able to look myself in the mirror each day and know I tried to do something about what I perceived to be wrong. Do I believe the current politicians are evil? Of course not. I do believe they have lost touch though with what the residents really need.

I’ve been “involved” for a number of years now. All from the perimeter, never as an elected official. Some things got done, other things didn’t. It’s the things that didn’t get done that compel me to take the next logical step to trying to make sure they do get done.

Tell Me I Can't

I love it when someone tells me “it can’t be done.” The argument usually goes a little something like people have tried before to do it and didn’t succeed so you’re wasting your time. It doesn’t seem to matter if they desire the change or not. They just are resigned to the fact that it can’t ever change. Never. Ever.

I’ve been told exactly that several times in recent memory. The first instance is when I started to try to get the residents of Masullo Estates involved to obtain long-overdue road reconstruction and drainage relief for the neighborhood. Every single person I encountered said it would never happen. I was wasting my time. Did I know how many times they had already tried and failed? This was a decades old problem that no one was ever going to address. Never. Ever. Thankfully, enough people were willing to go along with my foolhardy notion that this time might be different. They didn’t believe me but they were willing to stand with me. John Mertz was among them. He may have been the only other person to actually believe we could do it. He certainly was as committed as I was. It took nearly 5 years, but we persevered and emerged with an approved project.

During that period, I also mounted an effort that most everyone thought was sheer lunacy. I opposed Wal-Mart and their plans to build a new super center in an inappropriate location. No one believed that the behemoth that was Wal-Mart could possibly be thwarted…but we prevailed there too…despite the declarations that it simply couldn’t be done. Strangely enough, John Mertz was an advocate with me on that victory too.

I’ve been told that to run an independent campaign against the major parties, with limited resources, and without mud-slinging was also a pipe dream, no matter how noble. We’ll find out soon enough if I can prevail on that count.

Lately, I’m hearing a similar sentiment when I talk about my 0% tax pledge. There is no doubt in my mind that it’s the right message and is attainable. Still, I occasionally run into the person that says, “It can’t be done.” When I ask them why they think that the reply is something like, “because taxes always go up – it’s just the way it is and you’ll never be able to change that.” Incredible isn’t it? They just reluctantly throw up their hands and say oh well, that’s the way it is so I guess I have to accept it. I don’t accept it.

I had the great privilege of watching my oldest daughter obtain her MBA from Union College this weekend. I can’t describe in words how proud of her I am. She worked hard. I bring this up because the commencement speaker struck a theme of perseverance I could personally relate to. Interestingly, his remarks contained a secret I learned myself long ago and perhaps is the reason for my own successes. Failure is a key component of success. Every time you fail, you actually get one step closer to your desired goal, because you learn something. You learn what doesn’t work. It sounds cliché, but it is the absolute truth. It’s all about perseverance. You don’t have to accept the status quo simply because it is. You can change it.

So please… tell me I can’t. It’s the biggest motivating force there is. The more I hear it, the more confident I become that I’ll eventually reach the goal. I won’t ever stop persevering. Never. Ever.

Tremor

Did you feel that? A political tectonic plate shift occurred today when John Mertz announced his intention to seek re-election to the Rotterdam Town Board, despite not receiving the Republican Party endorsement. Good for him! Though often tasked with being the front-man for all issues controversial, Mr. Mertz was always a strong voice for the residents. As arguably the largest vote-getter among the incumbents seeking re-election, his entry into the race throws down the gauntlet to the existing Republican Party establishment.